Re: SMB parallelization

[Brandon Enright <bmenrigh () ucsd edu>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:48:12 -0700
David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:02:30PM -0500, Ron wrote:
> > I'm finishing off a 15-hour day of SMB work, but it's been
> > incredibly productive! This is my final submission for now, I hope
> > I can still type coherently. :)
[...]
> I think I understand the technque you are using. I would be concerned
> that it could fail just by chance with large numbers of connections,
> but your testing with Brandon shows that it's not much of a worry.
> Feel free to commit it.
>
> David Fifield

I was mindful of this in my scan.  I set --min and --max-parallelism to
768 to prevent overloading select().  I assume that's still the right
way to handle this -- if it isn't let me know.

If you are under socket pressure, NSE and especially smb-* with this
patch are very easy ways to run out of resources.

Brandon

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkylLxQACgkQqaGPzAsl94LHQQCfdX3bF0+1ZiFXDhP2g7iIIUZw
iN8An0LEUMmqerfso7iA948gajbvWXcX
=BSAC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/